An Argument for the use of Aristotelian Method in Bioethics

Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 9 (1):69-79 (2005)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The main claim of this paper is that the method outlined and used in Aristotle’s Ethics is an appropriate and credible one to use in bioethics. Here “appropriate” means that the method is capable of establishing claims and developing concepts in bioethics and “credible” that the method has some plausibility, it is not open to obvious and immediate objection. It begins by suggesting why this claim matters and then gives a brief outline of Aristotle’s method. The main argument is made in three stages. First, it is argued that Aristotelian method is credible because it compares favourably with alternatives. In this section it is shown that Aristotelian method is not vulnerable to criticisms that are made both of methods that give a primary place to moral theory (such as utilitarianism) and those that eschew moral theory (such as casuistry and social science approaches). As such, it compares favourably with these other approaches that are vulnerable to at least some of these criticisms. Second, the appropriateness of Aristotelian method is indicated through outlining how it would deal with a particular case. Finally, it is argued that the success of Aristotle’s philosophy is suggestive of both the credibility and appropriateness of his method

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 76,264

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The question of method in ethics consultation.George J. Agich - 2001 - American Journal of Bioethics 1 (4):31 – 41.
Method in bioethics: A troubled assessment.Ronald M. Green - 1990 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 15 (2):179-197.
Toward a systematic philosophy of medicine.Gerlof Verwey - 1987 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 2 (2).
Casuistry and the Business Case Method.Martin Calkins - 2001 - Business Ethics Quarterly 11 (2):237-259.
Cartesian Method and the Aristotelian-Scholastic Method.D. Anthony Larivière - 2009 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 17 (3):463-486.
Method in catholic bioethics.Kevin P. Quinn - 2000 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 10 (4):353-363.
Natural Law, Skepticism, and Methods of Ethics.J. B. Schneewind - 1991 - Journal of the History of Ideas 52 (2):289-308.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-12-01

Downloads
231 (#54,247)

6 months
1 (#449,844)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Peter Allmark
University of Leeds (PhD)

Citations of this work

Aristotle for nursing.Peter Allmark - 2017 - Nursing Philosophy 18 (3):e12141.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Sources of Normativity.Christine M. Korsgaard - 1996 - Cambridge University Press.
Practical Ethics.Peter Singer - 1979 - Cambridge University Press.
After Virtue.A. MacIntyre - 1981 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 46 (1):169-171.
Modern Moral Philosophy.G. E. M. Anscombe - 1958 - Philosophy 33 (124):1 - 19.
A defense of abortion.Judith Jarvis Thomson - 1971 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 1 (1):47-66.

View all 37 references / Add more references